The Senegalese political arena frequently becomes a stage for power struggles, whether among members of the same party or between distinct political factions. As the British diplomat Lord Palmerston famously observed in 1848:
In politics, there are no permanent enemies, nor permanent friends, only permanent interests.
This enduring maxim perfectly encapsulates the current situation at the highest echelons of Senegal’s executive branch.
The once-unified Sonko-Diomaye alliance, comprising Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko, who initially presented a united front, is now grappling with significant internal discord. These escalating disagreements culminated on May 22, when the President announced the dismissal of his Prime Minister and the dissolution of the government.
While a major political gathering on November 8, 2025, hinted at nascent fratricidal divergences, an interview on May 2, 2026, removed any lingering ambiguity. The President himself publicly acknowledged disagreements with his Prime Minister, pointing to the “excessive personalization” of power around Sonko.
The recent transformations within the Senegalese political system, particularly with the rise of Les Patriotes africains du Sénégal pour le travail, l’éthique et la fraternité (PASTEF), the ruling party, and the sociopolitical realignments observed between 2021 and 2024 amidst significant political instability, reveal how this anti-establishment party successfully disrupted Senegal’s traditional sociopolitical order.
The illusion of an indivisible symbolic capital: a two-headed challenge
This unprecedented political partnership was forged when Sonko personally endorsed Diomaye following the invalidation of his own candidacy. Initially conceived as a complementary political force, one partner was tasked with managing the state apparatus, while the other provided robust political legitimacy during their initial months in power.
However, PASTEF’s large political rally on November 8, 2025, exposed the limitations of this two-headed illusion, largely championed by Sonko. “The aftermath of November 8,” as Sonko himself declared, marked a crucial turning point for the institutional partnership between the President and him. The relationship between the two now appears deadlocked. Disagreements first emerged over the choice of the ruling coalition’s coordinator, then over their fundamental visions of power, and finally over the selection of allies.
Consequently, the once-unifying slogan “Sonko mooy Diomaye” (Sonko is Diomaye, in Wolof), a survival strategy for PASTEF against the regime of former President Macky Sall, is now fading. It is being replaced by slogans such as “Sonko est Sonko,” or “Ousmane est Sonko.” Observations by journalist Sidy Diop align with this view, indicating that “the proclaimed unity has vanished. It gives way to a now visible, almost overt, duality, where roles are redefined and ambitions asserted.”
“Diomaye is no longer Sonko. Sonko is no longer Diomaye.” Yet, from the perspective of the theory of domination and symbolic reproduction, which enabled Sonko to exert a “proxy capital,” their symbolic fusion had created a unique “partisan habitus.” Within this, the homopastefien and sympathizers of the “Project” perceived not two distinct representatives, but a single, indivisible political force.
This duality at the top represents the temporal culmination of their initial “complementarity” upon entering the executive political sphere. The presidential nature of Senegal’s political system mandates a clear distinction where the President’s authority is not shared. The prerogatives of the President and the Prime Minister are meticulously defined by the Constitution in articles 42 to 52, transforming their initial fusion into a “gentle rivalry.”
President Diomaye frequently adopts a reserved posture, positioning himself as the guarantor of institutions, while Prime Minister Sonko maintains his characteristic register of mobilization and disruption. This aligns with what French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu described as the “position occupying the man,” where the institutional role dictates an individual’s actions, language, and demeanor, rather than the inverse. The presidential function imposes a “sovereign” habitus that inherently distinguishes itself from the “party leader” habitus of the Prime Minister. This distinction, in line with an ethic of separation between the roles of Head of State and party leader, led Diomaye to resign from his position as secretary-general and all governing bodies of the PASTEF party.
Furthermore, an invisible yet undeniable boundary exists between the President and his Prime Minister: the transition from “Diomaye est Sonko” street communication to institutional communication, where the President’s image takes precedence according to protocol. While Sonko propelled Diomaye to power, the President now wields discretionary authority, including the power of appointment, thereby fostering a political bipolarization between pro-Diomaye and pro-Sonko factions.
The limitations of duality
In the realm of physics, fluid mechanics teaches us that when two bodies of different masses share an enclosure, the one with superior mass compresses the other. Applying this to Diomaye and Sonko, it suggests that power is not static, much like human nature.
Through an ascending flow of influence, his charisma, and control of the party, Ousmane Sonko injects popular legitimacy into Bassirou Diomaye Faye. Conversely, through a descending flow of influence, Bassirou Diomaye, via his decrees and state decisions, materializes the aspirations of the “Project” by enshrining them in Senegalese positive law. Thus, if Sonko occupies too much space, his influence spills over into Diomaye’s institutional territory.
In such a scenario, the President might appear to be under tutelage. Conversely, if Diomaye becomes too isolated, he risks losing the vital source of legitimacy that Sonko represents. They are trapped in a system of mutual dependence and potential self-destruction. Power continuously flows between the presidential office and the Prime Minister’s residence, a dynamic that sustains their gentle rivalry.
By mirroring each other’s desires, they become antagonistic doubles. The more they resemble each other, the deeper their divergence becomes, for each sees their own ambition reflected in the other. Both actors covet the same objectives: power, the presidency, leadership. Sonko aspires to hold executive power; Diomaye seeks to consolidate his position.
The current power play at the highest levels reminds us that in politics, a “gentlemen’s agreement” is merely a myth for idealists. It is the relentless resurgence of the “number two syndrome.” The presumptive successor, initially loyal and competent, climbs the ranks only to turn against their leader when the latter commands all the attention.
The hegemonic actor, in their quest to secure future elections, transforms a loyal ally into an adversary out of suspicion. This dynamic further cultivates a reciprocal paranoia, foreshadowing a period of social and political turbulence ahead.
